This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

Originally Posted by presluc

Common sense is a good phrase too bad it isn't used as often in America today.

When every year or so some nut comes out with guns or a gun and kills innocent people .
One does not have to have a high IQ. to figure out there's something about selling guns to weirdos that isn't right.
So is the background checks working?
If they were this conversation wouldn't be necessary.

So is it time for the NRA to stop collecting money, stop making speeches and get off their lazy ass and do something?
Yes I would say it is.

You seem reluctant to accept the inescapable fact as long as people are alive, there are going to be murders. Sometimes one or two victims and sometimes many more. It doesn't mean we do not seek ways to prevent them but it does mean realizing **** happens.

Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

Originally Posted by Connery

A report could be made to the authorities, however, the standards may be more stringent requiring there must be an overt act where the person be placed under observation for 72 hours as the conduct may be indicative of someone who may want to hurt themselves or others. Moreover, I agree that monitoring for items that could be used to harm others should be in place and utilized.

Pretty much what I thought. I don't think "just anybody" should be monitored or their purchases, however if there is a reasonable suspicion, even by a citizen's own judgement I think it should be easier to monitor a specific individual and their purchases. Like many other mass murders there were signs that something wasn't quite right, but nobody did anything about it.

Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

I just wonder what "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is so difficult for the left to understand?

They want to make you register every gun.

They want to make you be limited on how many you can buy, and how much ammo you can buy.

They want to limit the size of the weapons you are able to own.

They want to limit the type of weapon you can own.

They want to limit the action of the weapons you own.

They want to limit the type of stock on the weapon you own.

They want to make it illegal for you to silence the weapon you own.

Oh well, so much for "shall not be infringed."

I know, isn't it ridiculous? Can you believe that Americans can't freely build nuclear weapons? The second amendment clearly protects the ownership of weapons. I need my nuclear weapon for self-defense.

You, of course, agree that we should be able to own nuclear weapons, right? Because, like you said, liberals want to "limit the type of weapon you can own."

Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

Originally Posted by Mustachio

I think this is a separate debate that isn't really that important in this matter. Throughout the history of this country, many of our citizens have taken it upon themselves to own guns and take advantage of advanced weapons technology. There will always be the debate of whether or not the advantages of protecting gun ownership outweigh the disadvantages, as your examples illustrate.

I think this is a different debate, because we're talking about a crazy 24 year old who purchased thousands of rounds of ammunition and a semi-automatic assault rifle that has no purpose other than to kill human beings. There are no advantages of allowing anybody who has an internet connection to stockpile assault weapons and ammunition. What would be the problem with restricting the sale of guns like this? When you mentioned the citizens who used guns to prevent or stop violent attacks, did any of them need 6,000 rounds of ammunition and a semi-automatic assault rifle?

How much is a stockpile and what is wrong with it? I own 3 different kinds of shovels, 5, if you count trowels. Am I stockpiling shovels? Am I stupid for having more than one kind? Why is it antigun freaks and the media always refer to guns as being stockpiled? Or cached? My wife has more shoes than I have guns, a hell of lot more, but no one would refer to them as a "shoe cache". "Stockpile" and "cache" really aren't quantitative, are they? Their buzzwords, emoto-words to manipulate the minds of the masses.

Does anyone need to buy 6,000 round for personal defense? Depends, how many types of guns are you going to buy for and for how long? And by the way, Holmes didn't use 6,000 rounds, did he? So that hysterical argument is superfluous. How many rounds did he fire in the theater? You don't know, do you? It wasn't 6,000, so stop saying that.

Wasn't it earlier that this month the GOP found Holder in contempt of congress because they were disgusted with his oversight of a program that allowed weapons like this to fall into the hands of criminals? Why was it that in that case conservatives acknowledged that the availability of these guns would cause or increase senseless violence and could not be permitted to fall into the wrong hands, but here we are a few weeks later and conservatives have already slipped back into "guns don't kill people, people kill people" mode?

Do try to keep up, Mustachio. Legal gun dealers are not selling guns to people illegally. Holmes had to pass background checks, he passed. Unless you have information I don't, the apples to donkey balls comparison you are trying to make would necessitate the ATF to do a background check on the narcotraficantes they sold the guns to. I guessing that the sicarios who bought the illegal guns failed to qualify under federal law. How does this compare with Holmes? It's a stretch and you failed.

We don't know yet that Holmes is insane. We are hearing that he has no criminal record and no history of mental illness. We know that he could easily have purchased these guns illegally, the ammunition as well. So what exactly are you saying?

Would you stop with assault rifle thing? We know that you don't know what you are talking about. Your aversion to public ownership of AR-15 guns is because (list them all, please)?

An AR-15 can be excellent for home defense and with the right defensive load can be safer for innocents in other rooms and for neighbors over a pistol shooting JHP or ball. But you want to ban assault weapons because...?

Though you didn't bring it up let's address the drum magazine. I personally don't care if people want to own them. You couldn't give me one. I certainly would never depend on one to protect me or mine. They jam. Shooters know they jam. I wasn't surprised to read that the drum mag jammed on Holmes. If you are planning to shoot at me I'd want you to have a gun or magazine that is known to jam.

Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

I don't think I'm the only American that wants stricter gu8n control , run the numbers try using all political parties.

Anyone with a brain might take into consideration, if someone is planning to kill someone with a gun making it difficult to aquire a gun would be a priority.

Tell us where you live and I'll start a collection to have a nice permanent sign for your house saying, "The Occupants Are Not Armed. We Do Not Believe in Civilian Gun Ownership." We'll have one made for your cars as well and maybe a some buttons made for you and your family to wear.

Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

An AR-15 can be excellent for home defense and with the right defensive load can be safer for innocents in other rooms and for neighbors over a pistol shooting JHP or ball.

I don't agree with that, but the rest of the post is good. I think the ar15 is a great all-around rifle with countless possible accessories/modifications, but it would be a very poor choice for home defense.

Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

Originally Posted by Risky Thicket

How much is a stockpile and what is wrong with it? I own 3 different kinds of shovels, 5, if you count trowels. Am I stockpiling shovels? Am I stupid for having more than one kind? Why is it antigun freaks and the media always refer to guns as being stockpiled? Or cached? My wife has more shoes than I have guns, a hell of lot more, but no one would refer to them as a "shoe cache". "Stockpile" and "cache" really aren't quantitative, are they? Their buzzwords, emoto-words to manipulate the minds of the masses.

Do try to keep up, Mustachio. Legal gun dealers are not selling guns to people illegally. Holmes had to pass background checks, he passed. Unless you have information I don't, the apples to donkey balls comparison you are trying to make would necessitate the AFT to do a background check on the narcotraficantes they sold the guns to. I guessing that the sicarios who bought the illegal guns failed to qualify under federal law. How does this compare with Holmes? It's a stretch and you failed.

We don't know yet that Holmes is insane. We are hearing that he has no criminal record and no history of mental illness. We know that he could easily have purchased these guns legally, the ammunition as well. So what exactly are you saying?

Holmes, by my definition, is insane. There are no sane people who give up their entire lives at the age of 24 in order to kill a lot of innocent people. He's also stupid by my definition, but that's not the point.

Secondly, my oldest brother has about a hundred pairs of shoes. I find it appalling and have many times used the words "stockpile" and "cache" in reference to them. Your comments are betraying your bias, which is obviously that you hate tree huggers, hippies, liberals, those who drop out, turn on, tune in, go green, eat flax seed and oppose guns. But here's the thing: we all agree that the government should prohibit some weapons. We might not agree on which ones, but we all agree that certain things (like nuclear weapons) we shouldn't be allowed to have no matter how many background checks we pass. This is the argument. It's so dishonest to claim that this debate is one side trying to take away your guns and the other side is the constitutional group of patriots trying to defend everybody's freedom. Of course we're not going to agree on anything when you go into it with that mindset.

Again, with the Holder thing: two weeks ago conservatives acknowledge that semi-automatic rifles are dangerous and shouldn't fall into the wrong hands. Now, suddenly, gun control is back in the news with this issue and everybody is quick to say "there's nothing wrong with these weapons and prohibiting them will only make things worse." Well, I think, and many others think, that we should be more careful, have a more thorough process, and try to prevent these things from happening.

I'm going to get frozen yogurt now. I'm sorry I won't be able to argue back.

Re: Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver [W:120]

Originally Posted by Mustachio

I know, isn't it ridiculous? Can you believe that Americans can't freely build nuclear weapons? The second amendment clearly protects the ownership of weapons. I need my nuclear weapon for self-defense.

You, of course, agree that we should be able to own nuclear weapons, right? Because, like you said, liberals want to "limit the type of weapon you can own."

Yea, people should be able to use nuclear weapons. That's what I meant when I said type. I couldn't have possibly meant assault rifle, handgun, etc.

You wonder how some people manage to raise a fork to their mouth every day when they are unable to put together a coherent argument. That's ok, another desperate reach. I see lots of desperation on the left, and tons of laughing on the right.